Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 30, 2017 19:14:14 GMT -5
Gaah! I wish I wasn't having such a busy day! First, the bigger news today may actually be Papadopoulos pleading guilty to lying about his contacts with Russian agents. www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/trump-campaign-adviser-george-papadopoulos-pleads-guilty-lying-n815596Very quick thoughts -- my gut is that they have something bigger on Mr. P, but are letting him plead guilty to a lesser charge in order to use his info against bigger fish. My other gut is that they are plan to use Manafort and Gates the same way. I think they're aiming right at the top -- Trump and his family. And we're going to see a lot of shoes dropping. I'd now be willing to bet money Trump doesn't run in 202O, and I think there's an excellent chance he resigns sooner. I believe this nothing burger is stacked with six patties, bacon, double cheese, and a whole lotta special sauce, with a super-sized side order of fries and a chocolate shake on the side. ETA: Also onion rings.
|
|
|
Post by mikey on Oct 30, 2017 20:05:49 GMT -5
I'm thinking it's very likely that the Podesta's will get rolled on hard in this sweep. And who knows who else connected with the Podesta's.
One can only hope they all go down in a flaming heap. Bigger fish indeed
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 30, 2017 20:10:05 GMT -5
If you are among those hoping Hillary Clinton gets indicted, I think you will find yourself very disappointed.
Don Jr., on the other hand...
|
|
|
Post by mikey on Oct 30, 2017 21:04:30 GMT -5
It'll depend on whether Mueller is really non partisan and has integrity.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 30, 2017 21:20:10 GMT -5
It'll depend on whether Mueller is really non partisan and has integrity. Trump, Hannity, and the whole banging lot of the Trump cabal lauded Mueller's integrity to the skies when he was appointed. You do know he's a Republican, right? Appointed by one of Trump's guys? What it will depend on is whether Hillary actually did anything indictable. And I would be willing to bet my retirement savings she did not. The current spins on Fox etc., on how Hillary really was the colluder are ludicrous on their face. She colluded with the Russians to get that dossier and get her emails hacked so she could.... what, put out news about the emails just before the election and ruin her chances at winning? And wait to release the dossier until AFTER the election, instead of before? Worst. Collusion. Ever. Or, wait, you aren't thinking she's going to be indicted for that private email server, are you? Tell me you aren't. Cause, yeah, no, that's never happening. You seem pretty sure she should be indicted. Lay out for me, if you can, a coherent theory of the grounds on which she should be indicted, along with your support for why you believe it. (Fair warning -- I'm a lawyer. And we've got a second lawyer on here, too.) Although I voted for her, I don't love her, and people hereabouts can tell you I did my share of criticizing her during the election. I don't think she's a saint and she's done stuff I don't like. But I've seen and heard nothing -- nothing -- remotely credible that comes anywhere close to an indictable offense. And I've been paying attention. And I'm a lawyer. If you've got a theory, lay it out. Explain why you believe it, with cites. ETA: The article linked in this tweet gave me a giggle.
|
|
|
Post by haggis on Oct 30, 2017 21:55:58 GMT -5
It'll depend on whether Mueller is really non partisan and has integrity. For the record, he's not non-partisan. He's a registered Republican.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 30, 2017 21:59:37 GMT -5
It'll depend on whether Mueller is really non partisan and has integrity. For the record, he's not non-partisan. He's a registered Republican. I'm old enough to remember this:
|
|
|
Post by haggis on Oct 30, 2017 22:05:52 GMT -5
Sadly, Gingrich wouldn't recognize integrity if it bit him on on the ass while on the way from his wife's hospital room to the comfort of his lover's embrace.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 30, 2017 22:14:52 GMT -5
Sadly, Gingrich wouldn't recognize integrity if it bit him on on the ass while on the way from his wife's hospital room to the comfort of his lover's embrace. well, there's that. just saying, though -- the Trump Cheer camp was all about how awesome Mueller was...until it started to look like his investigation would turn up the dirt on Trump and his cohorts.
|
|
|
Post by mikey on Oct 30, 2017 23:23:38 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by robeiae on Oct 31, 2017 7:35:13 GMT -5
Very quick thoughts -- my gut is that they have something bigger on Mr. P, but are letting him plead guilty to a lesser charge in order to use his info against bigger fish. My other gut is that they are plan to use Manafort and Gates the same way. I think they're aiming right at the top -- Trump and his family. And we're going to see a lot of shoes dropping. I'd now be willing to bet money Trump doesn't run in 202O, and I think there's an excellent chance he resigns sooner. I believe this nothing burger is stacked with six patties, bacon, double cheese, and a whole lotta special sauce, with a super-sized side order of fries and a chocolate shake on the side. ETA: Also onion rings. They've had the goods on Mr. P for months. It's not accident that his plea came when Manafort was indicted. I think it obvious that Mr. P was the road into Manafort. I doubt we'll hear much more for him. And agree about Manafort: this is all about pressuring him (and Gates). As to where they're aiming, I thought the deal with Muelller is that he'll go wherever the evidence takes him, no? I'm sure Trump and company are nervous, but Clinton and folks at the Clinton Foundation probably are too. Many of the players are the same, or are at least tied together, in one way or another. It's not simply chance that the same person who approached Manafort has also worked with Fusions GPS, just like it's not simple chance that both Clinton and Trump have done photo ops with Weinstein. Shoes could be dropping all over the fucking place, because there's a shit-ton of corruption among all these bastards.
|
|
|
Post by Angie on Oct 31, 2017 23:32:20 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by poetinahat on Nov 1, 2017 0:40:09 GMT -5
That was a *fun* read. Thanks, Angie.
|
|
|
Post by robeiae on Nov 1, 2017 6:21:49 GMT -5
I learned that from an episode of Law and Order...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 3, 2017 9:57:47 GMT -5
Sorry for the delayed response. I've been busy. On Mueller's non-partisanship: He's not a "non-partisan" in the sense of not belonging to a party. However, he's long (very long) been respected for his separating his own political inclinations from his job. He doesn't cede favors to those belonging to his party and look the other way when they do wrong. He worked with and was respected by presidents of two different parties. His reputation for integrity, as well as his reputation for thoroughness and competence, was why his appointment was universally hailed by Republicans and Democrats as a master stroke -- the feeling was that Mueller would find where the bodies were buried, if any were to be found, and if he proclaimed that there were no bodies to be found, both Democrats and Republicans would accept it from him. Haggis and I pointed out Mueller is, in fact, a Republican, because it is absurd to assert that he's biased on behalf of Democrats and working this investigation to benefit them. IF, for the sake of argument, Hillary Clinton committed treason during the election, I've no doubt Mueller would and will uncover it and go after her for it. My point is that his failing to dig up anything on her does NOT mean, as your original post implied, that Mueller is partisan and biased. It might just mean there's nothing to find. (Nothing prosecutable, anyway.) You folks on the Trump side might need to stop and consider the possibility that Clinton did not in fact collude, commit treason, etc. The other thing you folks should stop and consider is that Trump is the president and Clinton is the losing candidate. Trump is the one who gained massive power from any illicit actions he and his campaign took. She's home sipping tea. He's out making sweeping changes to our country and our foreign policy. If he's a crook, or anyone in his administration is, addressing that is the priority. She can wait. On Podesta -- I'm sure you've all noticed how the right-wing media is jumbling the Podesta brothers together. I have no love for either of them, or their ilk. I tend to think they are both slimy. However, one Podesta brother was implicated in the Manafort indictment, and the other was Hillary's campaign chairman. They are not fungible, nor can one's actions be attributable to the other. (e.g., I voted Hillary and despise Trump. My brother is an ardent Trump fan and despises Hillary. The differences between us do not stop there.) One brother might have done something illegal while the other was just the normal garden variety of political slime. Time and Mueller will tell. ETA: Amended to correct a hastily made and misstated point. My apologies. I'm still super busy and posting on the fly.
|
|